Liquid Millionaire, drying up?

This is a discussion on Liquid Millionaire, drying up? within the Educational Resources forums, part of the Commercial category; BIG NUMBERS alway's look better than small numbers, that's why Brother Stephen uses BIG NUMBERS with his long term performance ...

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 23, 2016, 10:00am   #33
Joined Aug 2016
4.5% return long term, pathetic.

sigmund1 started this thread BIG NUMBERS alway's look better than small numbers, that's why Brother Stephen uses BIG NUMBERS with his long term performance record.

So I decided to pop the wart and take a closer look.

ISACO report a 121% total return over 18 years ending December 31, 2015.

So how does that look on an ANNUAL BASIS?

According to the Calculator Web Site it works out around 4.43%.

Yep, that's 4.43% per year.

NASDAQ returned around 7.2% without dividends.

"It's all about results. You want to be teamed up with someone who can deliver the goods year in, year out". Say's Brother Stephen on page 113 Liquid Millionaire.

Our Nan say's, pity they can't do what they think they can do!... and that they remind her of that old Monkey's song...Day Dream Believer.

And where's that AUDIT?

Last edited by sigmund1; Oct 23, 2016 at 1:13pm.
sigmund1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 24, 2016, 9:22am   #34
Joined Aug 2016
4.5%, flaming pathetic.

sigmund1 started this thread I mean, let's face it, 4.5% pa return over 18 years is pretty rubbish. No it's worse than pretty rubbish, it's flaming pathetic!

Our Nan said that's CASH ISA.

What makes it worse, is that the Brother Sutherland's, on ISACO'S web site state that they aim for 8%-10% annual return.

They wrote that knowing full well they can only produce half that amount!

What, the Sutherland's think, for some reason they can get twice as better, somehow produce out of thin air twice the return...What a pair of silly bollox's.

They been watching too much Paul Daniels. Personally, I was more interested in Debbie MaGee.

I wonder what their clients make of all this, you know all those Plonker's that had their pictures printed in the back of Liquid Millionaire Book.

£3000 a year to get rubbish returns. You've all been had-over!

Maybe I could sell them something...I've got a bridge in London they might be interested in...great views, good price, only a few grand.

Last edited by sigmund1; Oct 24, 2016 at 5:53pm.
sigmund1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 25, 2016, 11:01am   #35
Joined Aug 2016
10% is better than 4.5%

sigmund1 started this thread Makes me wonder just what sort of person would invest with the likes of ISACO?

The book, Investing for Dummies seems to come to mind, or how about Investing for Morons...Investing for No-Hopers...Investing for Silly Bolloxs...Investing for Numb-Nuts. Investing for Those who Demand a Low Return.

Below, an article I tripped over, courtesy Moneystepper web site.

"I just want to summarize where that 10% return figure comes from as many people may have heard it (or similar figures) quoted, but not seen the backing support.

At Moneystepper, we use the figure based on the average return of major UK and US indices over the past 30-50 years.

• FTSE 100 at 6.1% per annum over 31 years plus dividends of around 3% per annum gives around 9%

• FTSE 250 at 8.3% per annum over 29 years plus dividends of just over 2% per annum gives around 10.5%

• Dow Jones Industrial Average at 9.3% per annum over 30 years plus dividends of just over 2% per annum gives around 11.5%

• S&P 500 at 7.6% per annum over 65 years plus dividends of just over 3% per annum gives around 11%

An average of all the above gives around 10% per annum average returns in the long term".

Our Nan says, 4.5%, their clients must be feeling quiet sick about now and where's that AUDIT you pair of Lurkers.
sigmund1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 27, 2016, 10:02am   #36
Joined Aug 2016
WHERE'S the AUDIT?

sigmund1 started this thread From the previous thread started by cliff back in 2011.

Paul Sutherland replied...

"After consulting with our finance director, and in the interest of our clients, prospects and future clients we feel it would be best that if we were to officially audit Stephen’s ISA Stocks and Shares ISA account, it would be best conducted by one of the four largest accountancy companies in the UK. The result of this would be a completely unbiased and transparent audit. I will be signing off now as I feel we have covered all the points brought up".

Please post future comments and questions to my personal email account paul (at) ISACO.co.uk
Also as I’ve mentioned on quite a few occasions now, if you prefer please feel free to call me on 0870 757 8554.

OK, 5 YEARS LATER WE ARE STILL WAITING FOR THAT AUDIT!

Clue...an audit looks like a long row of numbers detailing end of year profits and loss's...some audits even have monthly columns.

So, like your promise above, when are we going to see that "UNBIASED AND TRANSPARENT AUDIT" ???
sigmund1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2016, 12:28pm   #37
Joined Aug 2016
talking out there arses!

sigmund1 started this thread What does John Bogel and Warren Buffet have in common, answer, they're both opposed to aggressive investing.

Crickey, does that mean, they think the likes of Brothers Sutherland are talking out their arses...you got it one!

An additional myth that is busted by both Vanguard and Standard and Poor’s is the notion that actively managed funds tend to outperform in bear markets because active managers can move into cash or rotate into defensive securities to mitigate the downturn. As the authors of the Vanguard study observe, “In reality, the probability that these managers will move fund assets to defensive stocks or cash at just the right time is very low.” In four of seven bear markets since January 1973, the average active fund did not outperform the index.
The Case for Index-Fund Investing1 from Vanguard Research. As with the Standard and Poor’s Index versus Active (SPIVA) Scorecard2, the conclusions reached are:

1) The average actively managed fund has underperformed its benchmark, and the extent of underperformance increases directly with the length of the evaluated time period. There are no “inefficient” market segments where active funds have an advantage.

2) The performance gap worsens once “survivorship bias” is taken into account (i.e., once the performance of terminated funds is included).

3) Persistence of performance among past winners is no more predictable than a flip of a coin.
sigmund1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 30, 2016, 12:22pm   #38
Joined Aug 2016
What a load of drivel

sigmund1 started this thread The Brothers Sutherland just keep on, keeping on...with DRIVEL!

I copied the below direct from their web site.

Seems the Brothers are really pround of their LONG TERM UNDERPERFORMANCE RECORD. 4.5% PER ANNUM.

They can't even present the facts without making mistakes (that might have something to do with an F in Maths)

Brother Stephen's first mistake...he forgot to include DIVIDENDS in FTSE calculations.

Brother Stephen, REALLY, FYI, that makes the FTSE 8.9% LONG TERM.

Brother Stephen, just to remind you...ISACO only managed 4.5%. LONG TERM.

Are they both really that thick?


What is your investment track record?..."We are extremely proud of our long, medium and short term ‘market beating’ performance. The FTSE 100, our benchmark, has annualised 5.9% since its inception 32 years ago1. That tells us that if we can beat the FTSE 100 over the long term, we’re going to be blessed with a reasonable rate of return".
sigmund1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 31, 2016, 1:48pm   #39
Joined Aug 2016
How to Look Good

sigmund1 started this thread How to look good? ...Use the Brothers Paul and Stephen method.

It's easy, just pick one of the worst performing Index's and say...look everybody...we can beat it.

Bloody amazing, why doesn't every one do that?

Answer, cos they don't want to look like a bunch of dodgy cowboy's.

But for the Cowboy Brothers it's the newly adopted FTSE 100, an Index, that even Stevie Wonder could see has been under performing since Queen Victoria's time.

Newly adopted, yes.

Strangely, there is no mention of the FTSE100 in Liquid Millionaire book, not one mention, no where, none, nada, zilch, zero!

But what is mentioned, oh yea, the Nasdaq, the Nasdaq is the bench mark back then.

There are dozens of references to the Nasdaq....we aim to beat the Nasdaq...Beat the Nasdaq over the long term...What you now know is that the system my clients and I use is capable of beating the Nasdaq, p97.

It just goes on and on and on.

OK, we got it...the benchmark is the Nasdaq.

Well, it was back in 2007.

But why did the Cowboy Brothers change the benchmark?

You guessed it...because they started to UNDER PERFORM THE NASDAQ.

I wonder where the Cowboy Brothers will go when the FTSE starts to out perform their fund picking method?
sigmund1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 1, 2016, 10:24am   #40
Joined Aug 2016
Spiva

sigmund1 started this thread What is SPIVA?

SPIVA is what garlic is to Vampires. Silver Bullets to Werwolves.

It's a web site dedicated to comparing ACTIVE MANAGED FUNDS v THEIR RESPECTIVE BENCHMARK.

I doubt very much that Brother Paul and Brother Stephen have heard of this web site and even if they have I doubt they could understand it anyway!

Recall, they got an F in maths. page 3 Liquid Millionaire.

But what is certain is that SPIVA is a double massive pain in the arrse for ACTIVE FUND MANAGERS like the Sutherland's.

The reason, SPIVA simply tracks the performance of active funds and it aint a pretty sight.

"According to the S&P Persistence Scorecard, relatively few funds can consistently stay at the top. Out of 641 domestic equity funds that were in the top quartile as of March 2014, only 7.33% managed to stay in the top quartile at the end of March 2016. Furthermore, 8.5% of the large-cap funds, 3.26% of the mid-cap funds, and 0.68% of the small-cap funds remained in the top quartile".
sigmund1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Liquid Millionaire, ISACO, Stephen Sutherland cliffconway Educational Resources 117 Jul 2, 2013 3:41pm
Liquid Capital or Liquid Trading? Black Swan General Trading Chat 3 Jan 27, 2010 3:40pm
Who Wants to be a Millionaire? rols The Foyer 18 Aug 26, 2008 3:45am
Who wants to be a Millionaire... ChartMan The Foyer 7 Jan 9, 2008 1:00am

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)